2026-02-03 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Hernandez moved to remand Item No. 15 to the Police Oversight Commission, seconded by Councilmember Vazquez. MINUTES: Chief Rodriguez clarified that while flight times vary by service call, drones do not record in transit to the call of service, and the footage is treated as a public record similarto body wom cameras. He stated that audit logs will be available to view on a forward-facing website and stated that the use of a drone at the shopping center incident allowed constant aerial monitoring during the 1 1-hour incident. He also stated that Policy 606 is in place to ensure they are able to exercise their right to protest and that drones do not record when monitoring protests. He confirmed that drones can assist the Fire Department and can only operate beyond city limits to support neighboring jurisdictions when requested. Councilmember Bacerra asked regarding the next steps for finalizing the draft policy should the item pass and stated that the current version addresses most public concerns. He also noted the drone's potential to target illegal fireworks and facilitate de- escalation, including during peaceful protests. Chief Rodriguez stated that the department would take input from the Council and will go through an internal department process to finalize the policy. Mayor Amezcua asked whether the current drone at City events is a city drone that records footage and whether the City is in compliance with California's military equipment requirement. City Manager Alvaro Nunez stated the drone belongs to the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Department and is used to record and photograph promotional footage at city events. City Attorney Carvalho clarified the drone footage would comply with all privacy rights protections in the same way body-worn camera footage is processed for release under a Public Records Act request. Councilmember Hernandez stated that although the Police Department is now in compliance with the California military equipment requirement it was due to the public's overwhelming request during a council meeting after the protest on June 9, 2025. Chief Rodriguez clarified that action to bring the department into compliance with the California military equipment requirement was put in motion before the protest in June. Councilmember Phan spoke regarding the policy's issue of privacy, transparency, and accountability. She asked for clarification regarding the requirement for the drone operator to be in "good standing,"whether the drone footage will be handled and managed similar to the footage captured by the body-worn cameras which is from the same manufacturer, whether probable cause limitations apply to the drones, whether the use of visual enhancement technology limitations is consistent with other types of police searches, and whether proactive policing and the drone being equipped with employing lethal force is CITY COUNCIL 12 FEBRUARY 3, 2026